Wednesday, October 27, 2004

Why active military favors President Bush 3-to-1, part 72



Click here for AmazonFormer New York City Police Commission Bernard Kerik --Police Commissioner on 9/11-- spent four months in Iraq after the fall of Baghdad. I interviewed him on the myth of the missing munitions today:

HH: "Have you been following this story?"

BK: "I have."

HH: "What's your reaction to this?"

BK: "I think it is a lot of the same that's been going on over the last month or so, some of the scare tactics, you know --social security, the draft, the personal attacks on Mary Cheney, on Laura Bush. I think this is a campaign where John Kerry is desperate. I think he is looking to say anything that will get him a vote, and he jumped right on these headlines yesterday by the New York Times, that there were 380 tons of weapons, of explosives missing, without realizing the facts You know...Keep in mind, and I know this broke last night, and it really hasn't got as much play as the Times' article yesterday, NBC had embedded reporters in with the 101rst airborne when they went into that camp the day after the fall of Baghdad.

The weapons were not there. John Kerry has been saying for the last year --depending on what day you talk to him-- he's been saying there were no weapons, Saddam was not a threat.

OK, well, yesterday he's screaming and yelling that Saddam was a threat with the weapons that are missing. Bottom line: There aren't any weapons or munitions missing that we didn't secure.

What John Kerry doesn't know or doesn't understand is that we seized more than 280,000 tons that were detonated already. We seized another 160,000 tons that are pending detonation. You know, Hugh, every day that I was in Iraq, every single day, for the four months I was there, every aftrenoon at 12 o'clock in the afternoon, there were massive explosions out by the international airport. It was the U.S. military blowing this stuff up. People have to realize that all of Iraq was a weapons cache. The whole country was saturated with explosives. And this is what President Bush meant when he talked about the threat. This was a part of that threat. We have been addressing the issue since we got there. The problem is that John Kerry just doesn't have a clue."

The other problem that Commissioner Keric didn't mention is that John Kerry instinctively trusts the U.N. bureaucracy at the I.A.E.A. to do its job better than the 101rst Airborne. No wonder the troops that are either serving in Iraq or have served there prefer George Bush by a three to one margin over John Kerry.


Hugh Hewitt: John Kerry trusts UN bureaucrats more than the 101st Airborne

I'm shocked... SHOCKED...



Click here for AmazonEditor & Publisher Magazine reports:

A new study for the non-partisan Project for Excellence in Journalism suggests that in the first two weeks of October, during the period of the presidential debates, George W. Bush received much more unfavorable coverage from some media than Sen. John Kerry.

In the limited sample (which included four newspapers, two cable news programs and seven shows on broadcast networks), more than half of all Bush stories were negative in tone, during this period. One-quarter of all Kerry stories were negative, according to the study.


New Study Suggests Some Media Favored Kerry in First Two Weeks of October

Tuesday, October 26, 2004

Viet Cong approved of Kerry's behavior



Click here for AmazonThomas Lipscomb reports for the New York Sun on the discovery of Viet Cong documents that show the VC had its eye on the young John Kerry, and not because he was second to no man in hunting them down. The documents, first archived in 1971, show that the Communists at the least followed Kerry's antiwar activities with approval and encouragement...

...Does this mean that Kerry accepted marching orders from the Viet Cong in 1971? No, or at least the documents discovered so far don't reach that conclusion explicitly. It does show, at the least, that John Kerry was a dupe of the VC/Hanoi Communists of the first order. The best one can conclude from the record is that the VC used Kerry as a pawn to undermine American resolve to fight the war, which allowed them to push the US out of Southeast Asia and eventually resulted in a Communist bloodbath in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia.

Kerry told us last week that he would go after terrorists with the same enthusiasm that he went after the Viet Cong. The only conclusion that one can draw from the historical record is that John Kerry will chase them to Paris to negotiate our surrender on their terms.


Viet Cong approved of Kerry's behavior

Reality or 'politics of fear'? Depends on who says it.



Click here for AmazonDick Cheney came under fire last week from the Left for his reference to the greatest threat confronting the United States: an extremist group getting their hands on a nuclear weapon and detonating it in one of our cities. Of course, I don't see any similar comments from the Left regarding Clinton SecDef William Cohen's remarks:

..."The greatest nightmare we have to go on is a nuclear bomb going off in one of our major cities," Cohen told the gathering of federal and private-sector information technology executives.

It is a "brave new world where terrorism and technology are merged," he added...


Reality or 'politics of fear'? Depends on who says it.

Monday, October 25, 2004

WaPo's Broder on the Candidates



Click here for AmazonHmmm. It could mean trouble when the Washington Post's David Broder, a moderate liberal, says the following about Kerry:

...[We] know much... about [Kerry's] liabilities: a tendency to overstudy issues, procrastinate and avoid hard choices; a willingness to be swayed by conflicting advice; an awkwardness in dealing with colleagues and staff; and a frequent impression that decisions are being guided by opportunism rather than firm beliefs... a man whose habits of mind and of action are far removed from the challenges of the White House...


To be fair, he's not praising Bush much either.

WaPo's Broder on the Candidates

Suddenly, Michigan is in play



Click here for AmazonTwo weeks ago, Democratic operatives began telling reporters that Michigan was in the bag.

They were wrong. Last Thursday, a poll in the Detroit News put President Bush ahead in Michigan by 4 points. A Knight-Ridder survey showed the race is a virtual tie.

This came as a shock to the Kerry camp, which has concentrated its efforts on other Big Ten industrial states. Kerry could win both Ohio and Pennsylvania and still lose the election. If he loses Michigan.

There are signs that Democrats are belatedly figuring this out. Last Sunday, Al Sharpton was dispatched to Detroit on an urgent mission to the city's churches...

...Kerry does have the official support of one group. The Arab-American Political Action Committee, located in Dearborn, has endorsed him. How much this will help the Democrats is an open question. Michigan's large Arab-American community runs the gamut from pro-Hezbollah radicals to conservative Christian Lebanese and includes many Chaldeans - Iraqi Christians - who are very grateful to Bush for bringing down Saddam Hussein.


Suddenly, Michigan is in play

Links o' the Day



Preacher Ted [Kennedy]

Full-page ad in the Washington Post from a private citizen

Sunday, October 24, 2004

Taking on water



Click here for AmazonIn early 2004, John Kerry was positioned to capture the Democratic nomination. The junior senator from Massachusetts had enjoyed a long career in Congress, albeit without sponsoring noteworthy legislation or serving on key committees with distinction. That said, Kerry's long record of public service spelled stability to many in the Democratic Party. And his Vietnam war service didn't seem to hurt, given the hardware with which he returned, including a silver star, a bronze star and three purple hearts.

In the spring, as the hierarchy of Democratic candidates began to shake out, Kerry's centrist positions gained momentum. Sown from a late-nineties trend towards hawkish-ness consistent with President Clinton's willingness to commit troops to far-flung locations -- Kerry appealed to the centrists of the party: a long-time dove turned hawk, just in time to confront the threat of global terrorism and WMD's in the possession of rogue states.

But onto the stage, from literally out of nowhere (Montpelier?), stepped Howard Dean: a true leader among the Left Bank of American politics. The former Governor of Vermont had, though force of will and an Internet-savvy cadre of backers, mobilized the hard Left of the party in a way not seen for decades. His primary message, an absolutist philosophy that rejected the Iraq war -- and perhaps any war at all -- resonated with his zealots. Dean disputed the notion that Iraq was connected to the global war on terror.

Kerry, who had beaten the drums of war while tensions escalated with Saddam Hussein, was now confronted with a monumental decision. A carefully cultivated hawkish stance now stood at odds with Howard Dean's unnerving momentum. A change was needed: the nomination hung in the balance.

In retrospect, Kerry did exactly what he had to do in order to regain his lost momentum. He veered left on the critical issue of the war, swerving back in front of the governor and recapturing the doves who required better credentials than Dean could muster. It was a savvy move by Kerry's team and one that also turned out to be the single most catastrophic mistake of the campaign.

Veering away from the center, in hindsight, is an egregious error for either party during the general election. The centrists of both parties, reminded of the devastating attacks of September 11th each time they see the Manhatten skyline, are committed to waging and winning the war on terror. Little sympathy can be mustered by most Americans for Iraq's government, whose affiliation with -- or outright sponsorship of -- the murderous posse of Abu Abbas, Abu Nidal, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, Ansar al-Islam, Hamas and Hezbollah resulted in the murder of Americans and others throughout the world

A "perfect storm" has indeed swamped the Democratic party. Population shifts, a successful faith-based appeal to minority voters by the GOP, along with the hijacking of the party by the Michael Moore-led Deaniacs, have all conspired to leave John Kerry -- and the entire party -- foundering. Only a return to the center can successfully inspire mainstream America to hitch their wagon to the Donkey. It may happen next year, or ten years from now, but it is inevitable if the Democratic party hopes to slow the momentum of the Grand Old Party.

Friday, October 22, 2004

Sacrificing Israel



Click here for AmazonTroubling storm clouds are gathering on the horizon, as Israel puts all options on the table vis a vis Iran's nuclear capability. As well they should, given Iran's promise to nuke Israel into rubble. The latest analyis indicates that Israel may have Iran in its gun-sites.

The future of Israel, in fact, might be in doubt regardless if John Kerry is elected president. Charles Krauthammer reads between the lines when John Kerry promises to "rebuild our alliances". That really means one thing, in his opinion, and he has a good case: it means
sacrificing Israel.

Election 2004: Perfect Storm



Click here for AmazonGerry Daly of dalythoughts.com crunched some Harris Poll numbers to see what it would take for John Kerry to overtake President Bush due entirely to increased turnout. He found that Kerry will need 9.6 million new voters. And he doesn't mean new voters between the ages of 18-21 who've never been able to vote for president before. He means "nearly 10 million people, aged 22 and over, who did not vote in 2000 but are going to this year."

"Maybe," Daly writes, "there is such antipathy towards George W. Bush that will bring voters out even more than the candidacy of Ross Perot did [in 1992]. We'll know in less than two weeks. If there are, then the Harris poll suggests that Kerry is in the ballpark. If these votes do not materialize, the Harris poll suggests that it will be a short night a week from Tuesday."

... The Horserace Blog, meanwhile, uses a poll by the Center for Policy and Economic studies to look at the black vote: "According to this poll, Kerry is underperforming among blacks by roughly 14 percent of the vote, a statistically significant difference. What would that mean if these numbers hold for the next month?"

The answer: "If there were a perfect replay of Florida, Kerry's total would shrink by 122,312 votes. If there were a perfect replay of Ohio, Kerry's total would shrink by 62,207 votes (making Nader's absence on the ballot this year wholly irrelevant). If there were a perfect replay of Michigan, Kerry's total would shrink by 56,542 votes. If there were a perfect replay of the national vote, Kerry's total would shrink by 1,459,966. In other words, Bush would win the popular vote by about 1 million votes! John Kerry simply cannot win this election if he performs among blacks 14 percent worse than Gore did."


John Podhoretz: Perfect Storm

Democrats have all but given up on the South



Click here for AmazonWhen John Kerry arrives in Reno today for his sixth visit to Nevada this year, he will underscore a dramatic shift in the geography of the race for the White House.

Kerry, in a virtually unprecedented move for a Democrat, is relying more on the West than the South in his plan to reach the 270 electoral votes needed for victory.

Once the party of the "Solid South," Democrats this year are not actively contesting any state in the region except Florida in the presidential campaign...


LA Times: Democrats have all but given up on the South, an unprecedented move

Bush Scaring Seniors Again



Click here for AmazonMy frail, 94-year old grandmother was rudely awakened at about one o'clock this morning by a very frightening phone call.

"HOWDY!" the loud voice said in a thick Texas drawl. "I'm George Bush! I just wanted to call to let ya'll know that when I'm re-elected, the first thing I'm gonna do is take away your social security. All you old geezers will be out on the street with the rest of the gutter trash!"

"Bull***t," Gramma shot back.

"No, bull***t, ma'am. No siree," Bush responded. "This is George Dumbya Shrub, the pee-Resident select, and I'm going to cut off your medicare, raise the prices on your prescription drugs, kill your poodle and burn your house down. Yeee-haaaaaaaw!"

"I'm hanging up," Gramma warned him.

After a brief pause, the caller changed tactics.

"Paralysis got you down?" he asked. "Vote for John Kerry, and you'll get up out of that wheelchair and walk again."

"I'm not in a wheelchair!" Gramma replied.

"Alzheimers, eh? Too bad Dumbya banned stem cell research, or your brain wouldn't slowly be turning into goo as we speak."

"Oh Jeezus!" Gramma groaned.

"Ah, an Evangelical, are ya? Did you know that Dick Cheney's daughter is a lesbian?"

"You're making me sick."

"Well, Gramma, you better hope it's not the flu, 'cause Bush is withhol-"

"Lawrence, is that YOU?" Gramma growled, cutting him off in midsentence. "You little sh*t! How'd you get my number?"

"Err...ummm..BUSH STOLE THE ELECTION!" the mysterious, yet enlightened caller stammered. "WHERE'S OSAMA, YOU CRAZY OL' BAT?"

*click!*

Alas, look at what it's come to. Bush has polarized this nation to such a degree that reich-wing grandparents are rudely hanging up on their own grandchildren, and getting unlisted phone numbers so you have to hire a private investigator to track them down. Some grandparents are even changing all the locks on the doors, and getting big guard dogs to keep friends and family from pulling out their Bush/Cheney yard signs and tp'ing their trees.

All this thanks to a man who promised to be a uniter, not a divider.


Bush Scaring Seniors Again

Pithy Line o' the Day



Hugh Hewitt: "How do you ask a goose to be the last goose to die for a campaign stunt? How do you ask a goose to die for a photo op?"

Flash Animation o' the Day



Florida Presidential Election Voting Simulator

Thursday, October 21, 2004

Bloody Iraq



Click here for AmazonIf you know anyone who isn't convinced that the War in Iraq is part and parcel of the war on terror, send them here. Of course, John Kerry thinks Iraq is a "profound diversion" from the war on terror. Personally, I think he knows better but, with him, it's all about political expediency. Review the facts and then let me know.

Nelson Ascher: Why I won't vote for Bush



Click here for AmazonAn attack that manages to ground all US and most of the world’s air traffic and close down the stock markets around the planet is something qualitatively different from a bomb in an Ulster pub. Human life is fragile, so is democracy, the world economy, globalization etc. The US can absorb U$ 1 trillion in damages. The rest of the world cannot. The US can survive a nuke in Manhattan. Brazil can survive a nuke in Sao Paulo. But Brazil cannot survive a nuke in Manhattan. What most of the world’s anti-Americans fail to understand is that whatever harms deeply the US harms us even more. Were Africa to suddenly disappear, it wouldn’t make much of a change in the life of New Yorkers. Were NY to disappear, Africa would go along...

...So, this is what I have to say for those who think that Americans have overreacted to 9/11. Actually they have under-reacted. One more attack on America and Latin America will be condemned to a further hundred years of solitude and misery.

There are around 200 countries in the world today. Think that every floor of each WTC tower was one of them. The richest were those closer to the ground, the poorest the highest ones. If the base crumbles, the hundredth floor is unable to stand alone in thin air. Besides, the closer people were to the ground, the safer they were. The whole world is the WTC and those who inhabit its higher floors want to see the building collapse. That’s as clever as setting fire to the floor below your own...

...The actual damage of a terrorist attack has less to do with its dimensions than with the when and where. A single, tiny blood clot can kill a 200 pound guy. On the other hand, though some people consider the possible nuking of a Western city a nasty thing that should cause no overreaction, the truth is that a nuke cannot logically be answered by anything less than at least two nukes. How long would any US president remain in the White House if, after the nuking of, say, LA, he went to national TV to say: we’ll find the culprits, capture them, send them to the Hague and you can all be sure they’ll spend the next ten years behind bars?


Nelson Ascher: Why I won't vote for Bush

Links o' the day



ABC can't find any Democrats voting for Bush

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20041020-121512-3016r.htm

Undecided Voters Break Towards The Challenger?

Wednesday, October 20, 2004

Why John Kerry shouldn't be president. By John Kerry



Click here for AmazonThe Five Bills John Kerry Passed during his two decades in the Senate:

S.791: Authorizes $53 million over four years to provide grants to woman-owned small businesses. (1999)

S.1206: Names a federal building in Waltham, Massachusetts after Frederick C. Murphy, who was killed in action during World War II and awarded (posthumously) the Medal of Honor. (1994)

S.1636: A save-the-dolphins measure aiming "to improve the program to reduce the incidental taking of marine mammals during the course of commercial fishing operations." (1994)

S.1563: Funding the National Sea Grant College Program, which supports university-based research, public education, and other projects "to promote better understanding, conservation and use of America's coastal resources." (1991)

S.423: Granting a visa and admission to the U.S. as a permanent resident to Kil Joon Yu Callahan. (1987)

Just Being John

"I voted for what I thought was best for the country. Did I expect Howard Dean to go off to the left and say, 'I'm against everything'? Sure. Did I expect George Bush to f*ck it up as badly as he did? I don't think anybody did." -- John Kerry in Rolling Stone

"I don't fall down," the "son of a b*tch knocked me over." -- John Kerry after falling when a Secret Service Agent accidentally got in his way on March 19, 2004

"Noting my physical discomfort beside him in the backseat, Wade asks Kerry, "Sir, have you ever considered getting a bigger car?" Kerry shoots back, "No, but I have thought about cutting all your f***ing legs off at the knees." -- From the John Kerry For President website in an article called "The Lighter Side of John Kerry".

-- "I don't own an SUV," said Kerry, who supports increasing existing fuel economy standards to 36 miles per gallon by 2015 in order to reduce the nation's dependence on foreign oil supplies... Kerry thought for a second when asked whether his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, had a Suburban at their Ketchum, Idaho, home. Kerry said he owns and drives a Dodge 600 and recently bought a Chrysler 300M. He said his wife owns the Chevrolet SUV. "The family has it. I don't have it," he said." -- The Guardian, April 23, 2004

-- "I'm fascinated by rap and by hip-hop. I think there's a lot of poetry in it. There's a lot of anger, a lot of social energy in it. And I think you'd better listen to it pretty carefully, cause it's important." -- John Kerry, 3/29/04

-- "President Clinton was often known as the first black president. I wouldn't be upset if I could earn the right to be the second." -- John Kerry, March 2004

-- "I'm a Christian. I've read the Bible and I know you can find the clauses that go both ways (on gay marriage). I'm not here to argue that with you." -- John Kerry on March, 2004

-- "I'm a liberal and proud of it". -- John Kerry on July 21, 1991

Iraq

-- "Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein and those who believe today that we are not safer with his capture don't have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president." -- John Kerry 12/20/03

-- "...(T)he satisfaction we take in (Saddam's) downfall does not hide this fact: We have traded a dictator for a chaos that has left America less secure." -- John Kerry, 9/20/04

- "Iraq may not be the war on terror itself, but it is critical to the outcome of the war on terror, and therefore any advance in Iraq is an advance forward in that and I disagree with the Governor [Howard Dean]." -- John Kerry, 12/15/03

-- "...(W)e must have a great honest national debate on Iraq. The President claims it is the centerpiece of his war on terror. In fact, Iraq was a profound diversion from that war and the battle against our greatest enemy, Osama bin Laden and the terrorists." -- John Kerry 9/20/04

-- "If you don't believe ... Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn't vote for me." -- John Kerry, USA Today on 2/13/03

-- "If you think I would have gone to war the way George Bush did, don't vote for me." -- John Kerry, Jan 2004

-- "I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq - Saddam Hussein is a renegade and outlaw who turned his back on the tough conditions of his surrender put in place by the United Nations in 1991." -- John Kerry, 7/29/02

-- "It's the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time." -- John Kerry, 9/06/04

-- "John Kerry said yesterday that he will treat the war on terror "primarily" as law-enforcement action..." -- Washington Times, April 19, 2004


Why John Kerry shouldn't be president. By John Kerry

Jimmy Carter: Military Genius



Click here for AmazonIt's been a long time since I've been exposed to the miltary genius of our 39th President -- so long that I've forgotten how idiotic one can be and still be elected to the White House. Fortunately, we have Hardball to allow us to bask in the undimmed genius of Jimmy Carter. Yesterday, Carter managed to write off the Revolutionary War as a mistake, and that was his opener for his interview with Chris Matthews...


Jimmy Carter: Military Genius

Tuesday, October 19, 2004

Tommy Franks: the truth about Tora Bora



Click here for AmazonPresident Bush and Senator John Kerry have very different views of the war on terrorism, and those differences ought to be debated in this presidential campaign. But the debate should focus on facts, not distortions of history.

On more than one occasion, Senator Kerry has referred to the fight at Tora Bora in Afghanistan during late 2001 as a missed opportunity for America. He claims that our forces had Osama bin Laden cornered and allowed him to escape. How did it happen? According to Mr. Kerry, we "outsourced" the job to Afghan warlords. As commander of the allied forces in the Middle East, I was responsible for the operation at Tora Bora, and I can tell you that the senator's understanding of events doesn't square with reality...


Tommy Franks: the truth about Tora Bora

So Much For The Truce!



Click here for AmazonThe cease-fire that Spain bought with Islamists with their capitulation after the Madrid bombings appears to have been an illusion, as predicted. Spain announced that it captured seven terrorists plotting to bonb their High Court, according to Reuters:

Police arrested seven suspected Islamic militants in raids across Spain on Monday to foil a planned bomb attack on the High Court, judicial sources said. The arrests came seven months after train bombs killed 191 people in Madrid.

The seven suspects, including four Algerians and one Moroccan, were arrested in the southern region of Andalusia, the Mediterranean city of Valencia and Madrid.

Further arrests could be made in the coming hours as part of the operation against a radical and violent Muslim network, the Interior Ministry said in a statement.


Perhaps the Spanish electorate will understand now that appeasing terrorists only leads to more terrorism, a lesson that Europeans learned the hard way 60 years ago. The Islamic lunatics don't want to be left alone, as many Europeans assume; they want to take over all of the old ummah, which includes most of Spain, especially Andalusia. The political success of the Madrid attacks has emboldened the fanatics to press their advantage, and the so-called "cease fire" announced by Osama bin Laden in the aftermath of Spain's withdrawal from Iraq only exists while tactically important for the next attack.

Maybe this will wake the Spaniards to the dangers of withdrawal and appeasement. I suspect the Socialists will be spinning this as a major victory on their behalf, which it is -- tactically speaking. Strategically, however, the Socialists have committed a huge error in backing down from the terrorists and fleeing Iraq, where establishing a functioning democracy would have a positive effect on stemming radicalism and terrorism.

For American voters, the same choices have been given to us in this election. Let's not allow ourselves to be fooled that leaving the Middle East would result in a safer America or a safer world.


So much for the truce

Bush in New Jersey



Click here for AmazonPoliPundit points us to one of Bush's best speeches regarding the fundamental differences between himself and John Kerry. Powerful, true and ultimately damning for the Senator from Massachusetts.

...Over a 20-year career in the United States Senate, Senator Kerry has been consistently wrong on the major national security issues facing our country. The Senator who voted against the $87 billion for our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq is the same Senator who has voted against vital weapons systems during his entire career. He tried to cancel the Patriot missile, which shot down scud missiles in Operation Desert Storm. He opposed the B-1 bomber, which was critical to victory in the Afghan campaign. He opposed the B-2 stealth bomber, which delivered devastating air strikes on Taliban positions. He opposed the modernized F-14D, which we used against terrorists in Tora Bora. He opposed the Apache helicopter, which destroyed enemy tanks and anti-aircraft missile launchers in Iraq.

The Senator who is skeptical of democracy in Iraq also spoke with sympathy for a communist dictator in Nicaragua in the 1980s, and criticized the democracy movement as “terrorism.” His misguided policies would have impeded the spread of freedom in Central America. The Senator who claims the world is more dangerous since America started fighting the war on terror is the same Senator who said that Ronald Reagan’s policies of peace through strength actually made America less safe. The same Senator who said the Reagan presidency was eight years of “moral darkness.”

In this campaign, Senator Kerry can run from his record, but he cannot hide...


PoliPundit: Bush in New Jersey

Links^H o' the Day



The Truth About Iraq

Monday, October 18, 2004

Kerry's Mideast



Click here for AmazonInstaPundit points us to Martin Peretz' savvy take on Kerry, Israel and the mess bequeathed by Bill Clinton's ill-fated appeasement of Arafat.

MARTIN PERETZ is very unhappy with the look of Kerry's mideast policy:

I've searched to find one time when Kerry — even candidate Kerry — criticized a U.N. action or statement against Israel. I've come up empty. Nor has he defended Israel against the European Union's continuous hectoring. . . .

This muddled foolishness reflects Kerry's sense of politics as desperate theater. . . . Kerry seems to have nostalgia for the peacemaking ways of Clinton. But what Clinton actually bequeathed to George W., says Benn, was "an Israeli-Palestinian war and a total collapse of the hopes that flourished in the 1990s…. The height of the peace process during the Clinton era, the Camp David summit in July 2000, was a classic example of inept diplomacy, an arrogant and rash move whose initiators failed to take into account the realpolitik, misunderstood Arafat and brought upon both Israelis and Palestinians the disaster of the intifada.


Ouch. Read the whole thing.


Martin Peretz on Kerry's Mideast Policy

Links o' the Day



Medienkritik vs. George Soros

Humor from Tim Blair: The Terrifying Face of the Left

Vladimir Putin: "I consider the activities of terrorists in Iraq are not as much aimed at coalition forces but more personally against President Bush. International terrorism has as its goal to prevent the election of President Bush to a second term. If they achieve that goal, then that will give international terrorism a new impulse and extra power." (PoliPundit).

Rumsfeld on the GWOT



Click here for AmazonInteresting summary of the current state of the war on terror... from SecDef Donald Rumsfeld.

...A little over three years ago, al-Qa'ida was already a growing danger. Its leader, Osama bin Laden, was safe and sheltered in Afghanistan. His network was dispersed throughout the world and had been attacking US interests for years.

Three years later, more than three-quarters of al-Qa'ida's key members and associates have been detained or killed, bin Laden is on the run, many of his key associates are behind bars or dead and his financial lines of support have been reduced.

Afghanistan, once controlled by extremists, today is led by Hamid Karzai, who is at the forefront of the world's efforts in support of moderates versus extremists. Soccer stadiums once used for public executions under the Taliban are today used, once again, for soccer.

Libya has gone from being a nation that sponsored terrorists, and secretly sought nuclear capability, to one that renounced its illegal weapons programs, and now says it is ready to re-enter the community of civilised nations.

Pakistani scientist AQ Khan's nuclear-proliferation network – which provided lethal assistance to nations such as Libya and North Korea – has been exposed and dismantled. Indeed, Pakistan, once sympathetic to al-Qa'ida and the Taliban, has under President Pervez Musharraf cast its lot with the civilised world and is a stalwart ally against terrorism.

NATO is now leading the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan and is helping to train Iraqi security forces. The United Nations is helping set up free elections in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Over 60 countries are working together to halt the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Three years ago, in Iraq, Saddam Hussein and his sons brutally ruled a nation in the heart of the Middle East. Saddam was attempting regularly to kill US and British air crews enforcing the no-fly zones. He ignored 17 UN Security Council resolutions.

Three years later, Saddam is a prisoner, awaiting trial. His sons are dead. Most of his associates are in custody.

Iraq has an interim constitution that includes a bill of rights and an independent judiciary. There are municipal councils in nearly every major city and in most towns and villages. Iraqis now are among those allowed to say, write, watch, and listen to whatever they want, whenever they want...


Donald Rumsfeld: Lessons of Cold War, relearned, promise victory over terror

Sunday, October 17, 2004

Message from Iraq



Click here for Amazon!Courtesy Powerline and Mudville Gazette:

...To start with, Senator Kerry may be a very good man and quite patriotic. Also we have to respect the almost 50% of the American people who lean towards the democrats. I don’t know much about domestic issues in the States so naturally, as might be expected, the position of any Iraqi would be mainly influenced by the issue that most concerns him.

Thus, regardless of all the arguments of both candidates the main problem is that President Bush now represents a symbol of defiance against the terrorists and it is a fact, that all the enemies of America, with the terrorists foremost, are hoping for him to be deposed in the upcoming elections.

That is not to say that they like the democrats, but that they will take such an outcome as retreat by the American people, and will consequently be greatly encouraged to intensify their assault. The outcome here on the ground in Iraq seems to be almost obvious. In case President Bush loses the election there would be a massive upsurge of violence, in the belief, rightly or wrongly, by the enemy, that the new leadership is more likely to “cut and run” to use the phrase frequently used by some of my readers. And they would try to inflict as heavy casualties as possible on the American forces to bring about a retreat and withdrawal. It is crucial for them to remove this insurmountable obstacle which stands in their way. They fully realize that with continued American and allies’ commitment, they have no hope of achieving anything.

On the other hand if President Bush is reelected, this will prove to them that the American people are not intimidated despite all their brutality, and that their cause is quite futile. Yes there is little doubt that an election victory by President Bush would be a severe blow and a great disappointment for all the terrorists in the World and all the enemies of America. I believe that such an outcome would result in despair and demoralization of the “insurgent elements” here in Iraq, and would lead to the pro-democracy forces gaining the upper hand eventually.

Note that we are not saying that President Bush is perfect, nor even that he is better than the Senator, just that the present situation is such that a change of leadership at this crucial point is going to send an entirely wrong message to all the enemies. Unfortunately, it seems to me that many in the U.S. don’t quite appreciate how high the stakes are. The challenge is mortal, and you and we are locked in a War, a National Emergency; and in such circumstances partisan considerations must be of secondary importance.

If you lose this war, you are no more, and you will have to withdraw within you boundaries cringing and waiting for terror to strike you in your homeland, afraid to move around, afraid to travel, afraid to do business abroad. You will have to see all your friends abroad annihilated and intimidated and nobody will have any confidence or trust in you anymore. And you will have to watch from far with bitterness the forces of darkness and evil taking over in many parts of this earth, with feelings of impotence and inability to do anything about it.

In other words you would lose all credibility, and the fiends of terror and obscurantism would go triumphantly dancing the macabre dance of mayhem and death, and darkness would descend and obliterate the light and the hope. You think I am exaggerating, you think I am being paranoid? I just pray that destiny would not prove all these things; I pray that these horrors will not come to pass. And all this for what? For failing to confront few thousands ex-baathists and demented religious fanatics and some common criminals, concentrated in some rural areas of a country of the size of just one of your states; and that for a nation that has defeated Natzism, Imperial Japan and the Soviet Empire!

Well if Senator Kerry is such a good man, and he may well be, then it would be prudent to wait just another four years to elect him, after the job is done. And if this is interference in your national affairs by a foreigner, I am not going to give you any apology for it.

Salaam


Message from Iraq

Saturday, October 16, 2004

Greatest Generation... or Last Generation?



Click here for Amazon!In that this will be my last column before the presidential election, there will be no sarcasm, no attempts at witty repartee. The topic is too serious, and the stakes are too high.

This November we will vote in the only election during our lifetime that will truly matter. Because America is at a once-in-a-generation crossroads, more than an election hangs in the balance. Down one path lies retreat, abdication and a reign of ambivalence. Down the other lies a nation that is aware of its past and accepts the daunting obligation its future demands. If we choose poorly, the consequences will echo through the next 50 years of history. If we, in a spasm of frustration, turn out the current occupant of the White House, the message to the world and ourselves will be two-fold.

First, we will reject the notion that America can do big things. Once a nation that tamed a frontier, stood down the Nazis and stood upon the moon, we will announce to the world that bringing democracy to the Middle East is too big a task for us. But more significantly, we will signal to future presidents that as voters, we are unwilling to tackle difficult challenges, preferring caution to boldness, embracing the mediocrity that has characterized other civilizations. The defeat of President Bush will send a chilling message to future presidents who may need to make difficult, yet unpopular decisions. America has always been a nation that rises to the demands of history regardless of the decisions. America has always been a nation that rises to the demands of history regardless of the costs or appeal. If we turn away from that legacy, we turn away from who we are.

Second, we inform every terrorist organization on the globe that the lesson of Somalia was well learned. In Somalia we showed terrorists that you don't need to defeat America on the battlefield when you can defeat them in the newsroom. They learned that a wounded America can become a defeated America. Twenty-four hour news stations and daily tracing polls will do the heavy lifting, turning a cut into a fatal blow. Except that Iraq is Somalia times 10. The election of John Kerry will serve notice to every terrorist in every cave that the soft underbelly of American power is the timidity of American voters. Terrorists will know that a steady stream of grizzly photos for CNN is all you need to break the will of the American people. Our own self-doubt will take it from there. Bin Laden will recognize that he can topple any American administration without setting foot on the homeland.

It is said that America's WWII generation is its "greatest generation." But my greatest fear is that it will become known as America's "last generation." Born in the bleakness of the Great Depression and hardened in the fire of WWII, they may be the last American generation that understands the meaning of duty, honor, and sacrifice. It is difficult to admit, but I know these terms are spoken with only hollow detachment by many (but not all) in my generation. Too many citizens today mistake "living in America" as "being an American." But America has always been more of an idea than a place. When you sign on, you do more than buy real estate. You accept a set of values and responsibilities. This November, my generation, which has been absent too long, must grasp that 100 years from now historians will look back at the election of 2004 and see it as the decisive election of our century. Depending on the outcome, they will describe it as the moment America joined the ranks of ordinary nations; or they will describe it as the moment the prodigal sons and daughters of the greatest generation accepted their burden as caretakers of the City on the Hill.

Matthew Manweller is a political science professor at Central Washington University.


Manweller Op-Ed

Honest Question for Kerry Supporters



Click here for Amazon!What in John Kerry's background or record convinces you to vote for him? Use the comments, below, to respond.